View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations PDCA Cycle |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For an improvement that still has to prove itself in everyday work, the method runs it through small learning loops. It connects planning, checking, and standardization into a repeatable learning mode. | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1 h bis mehrere Wochen | 10-30 min je Item | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-8 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | PDCA Log, Experiment Plan, Learning Outcome, Standard Change | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | Continuous improvementLeanExperiments | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |